Cited by 70Spinal Cord Injury ResearchNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery

Satisfaction with and usage of a hand neuroprosthesis

Wuolle, Kathryn Stroh, Van Doren, Clayton L., Bryden, Anne M., Hunter Peckham, P., Keith, Michael W., Kilgore, Kevin L., Grill, Julie H.·1999·Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Abstract

Objective To measure the satisfaction with, clinical impact of, and use of an implantable hand neuroprosthesis. Setting Eight different medical centers. Participants Thirty-four individuals with spinal cord injuries at the C5 or C6 motor level. Interventions Participants were implemented with a hand neuroprosthesis that provides grasp and release. The neuroprosthesis includes a surgically implanted stimulator, implanted electrodes sutured to the hand and forearm muscles, and an externally mounted controller. Main outcome measure A survey was mailed to study participants, who were asked to respond to statements such as "If I had it to do over, I would have the hand system implanted again," using a 5-level Likert scale ("strongly agree" to "strongly disagree"). Results Eighty-seven percent of participants were very satisfied with the neuroprosthesis, 88% reported a positive impact on their life, 87% reported improvements in activities of daily living, and 81% reported improved independence. Participants reported using the neuroprosthesis a median of 5.5 days per week; 15 participants used the neuroprosthesis 7 days per week, and 5 participants reported not using the device. Conclusions The neuroprosthesis was used by most participants. The neuroprosthesis performed satisfactorily, increased users' ability to perform activities of daily living and independence, and improved their quality of life.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0003-9993(99)90123-5

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wuolle, K. S., Van Doren, C. L., Bryden, A. M., Hunter Peckham, P., Keith, M. W., Kilgore, K. L., & Grill, J. H.
Affiliations
  • MetroHealth Medical Center (US)
  • Case Western Reserve University (US)
Venue
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1999-02
Volume
80
Issue
2
Pages
206-213
ISSN
0003-9993 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1977076149
Cited by
70
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2
FWCI
4.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Center for Research Resources (M01RR000080)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Spinal Cord Injury Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Keywords
spinal cord injury, patient satisfaction, device utilization, activities of daily living, independence, quality of life, implanted electrodes, grasp and release, upper limb prosthesis
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Disability Evaluation, Electrodes, Implanted, Electric Stimulation Therapy, Female, Hand, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Motor Skills, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Quality of Life, Spinal Cord Injuries, Patient Satisfaction, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Prosthesis Implantation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review